| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] upgrade to 2.6.18.8 ?
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 07:41:36PM +0800, Teck Choon Giam wrote:
> On 10/3/07, Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering whether we could apply the 2.6.18.8 patch to the linux tree?
> > Assuming that that patch makes 2.6.18 better...
> >
> > It should be fairly simple. Only two hunks dont apply (both in
> > net/core/skbuff.c) and those changes seem to already have been applied
> > anyway.
>
> I have been running 2.6.18.8 with Xen-3.1.0/Xen-3.1.1-rc1/Xen3.1.1-rc2
> and the patch series I just exclude
> net-gso-6-linear-segmentation.patch. The only problem I encountered
> is anything larger than 512MB in domainU might have such error:
>
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------
> Sep 27 01:46:43 XXX kernel: kernel BUG at
> /usr/src/xen-3.1.1-rc1-src/linux-2.6.18.8-xen/arch/i386/mm/hypervisor.c:167!
Do you have CONFIG_HIGHPTE enabled? CONFIG_HIGHPTE have caused problems
on 2.6.20 and 2.6.21 rebases of Xen 3.1 on Fedora, on pgd_pin() and
other page table updating hypercalls, because the kernel somehow was
trying to map page table entries as writeable.
'xm dmesg' should give more information on the cause of this Oops.
>
> I didn't try on 2.6.18 on domainU more than 512MB though so can't
> really comment on whether this is just happening to kernel 2.6.18.8.
I haven't reproduced my CONFIG_HIGHPTE problems on 2.6.18-xen-3.1.0,
also. I don't know if it was a problem of our Xen rebase or the problem
is present on the 2.6.18 xenbits tree.
Enabling CONFIG_HIGHPTE under Xen is not recommended, anyway. Even if
it was working, performance will probably suffer.
--
Eduardo
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home